Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 - 10-24-00November 14, 2000 Agenda Item No. 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session DRAFT October 24, 2000 - 5:00 p.m. INDEX Present: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Absent: Debay (excused) Due to mechanical problems with the recording equipment, the following Study Session minutes is a recap of the actions /discussions that took place. 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR City Clerk Harkless clarified that the proposed ordinances for Agenda Item No. 4 (Modification to Adult Entertainment Ordinance) and Agenda Item No. 5 (Amendments to NBMC Section 12.56 Regarding Bicycles) would become effective 30 days after adoption. 2. BUILDING AND PLANNING PLAN CHECK ACTIVITY AND STAFFING UPDATE. Council Member O'Neil stated that he was contacted by an architect who was complaining that he had to take a number and wait in line for an extended period of time to pick up plans. Council Member Ridgeway added that people coming in to view microfilm records had the same experience and, since the Building Department greets everyone who comes in, individuals seeking planning information may wait awhile before being served. Building Director Elbettar indicated that they monitor the time customers wait and changed the system from numbers to a written log which enables people to list the purpose of the visit. He stated that any staff looking at the log scans it to see if anyone is waiting for Planning staff and directs them to the Planning counter. He added that a change was implemented a week ago which utilizes two sign in sheets, one for small tasks such as picking up plans and one for permit issuance and plan submittals. Mr. Elbettar reviewed the Building Department's activity history as outlined in the staff report and emphasized that, for the past four years, the plan check workload has been at an all time high due to the higher customer service demand at the permit counter and the departure of one of the engineers. He added that, in conjunction with the reorganization of the Marine Division in July 2000, the Building Department also assumed responsibility for the plan check and record keeping for construction within the Harbor. He stated that, while the Building Department target turnaround time is three weeks, it has fallen to 4.5 weeks which is closer to the Planning Department's turnaround time of 6 to 7 weeks. Volume 53 - Page 643 Building and Plan Check Activity and Update (26) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX Mr. Elbettar reviewed the measures that have been taken to keep up with the increased workload. He explained that the department hired four plan check consultants for overflow plan checks, but noted that customers prefer that their drawings be checked in -house and prefer dealing with familiar City staff. He reported that the department has also used the expedited plan check service to check small projects like additions and alternations. However, since this service has been popular with the rise in construction activity, they have not been able to accommodate every request. He stated that the engineers have also been authorized to work overtime on regular plan checks to keep up with the workload. Further, since the Building Department plan check is done about two weeks before the Planning Department plan check, they resorted to releasing their corrections before the Planning Department's so customers can work on resolving these corrections while the planning plan check is in progress. While this measure helped customers, it created additional customer service work at the permit counter. Mr. Elbettar reported that the annexation of Newport Coast, Bay Knolls, and Santa Ana Heights will increase the City's building stock by 15 %. Due to the sustained high construction activity and the discontent of our customers with plan check consultants, the Building Department proposed during the budget process that the previously cancelled grading engineer position be filled by a plan check engineer position. Filling this plan check engineer position and restoring the number of plan check engineers to four is necessary even when the volume of construction neutralizes since the Building Department is also doing the plan checks for fire alarms, fire sprinklers, and harbor construction. Mr. Elbettar stated that, in addition to the customer service enhancements outlined in the staff report, staff also conducts standard plan sheets for window replacements, fences, and drainage work; has an overnight mail back service; conducts one week turnaround plan checks for tenant improvements; provides a counter computer for public access; conducts preliminary code reviews; includes image attachments to complaints in the permit system; has a call back program for inspections; and utilizes cell phone communication between contractors and inspection staff. In response to Council questions regarding the back log and the reasons why it takes so long to process plans, Mr. Elbettar stated that construction activity has increased over the last three years and staff is under pressure to fulfill the commitments they have made. He indicated that adding consultants does not provide a complete relief since staff still has to process plans and answer questions at the counter. Planning Director Temple reviewed the staff report and explained that the public service counter is the citizen's first source of information for zoning regulations and project compliance. She noted that plans are more complex than in prior years; and requirements, conditions of approval, and environmental mitigation measures attached to discretionary permits has increased. This has significantly increased the time it takes to complete plan checks for most projects. Volume 58 - Page 644 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes October 24, 2000 Ms. Temple acknowledged that the plan check turnaround time in the Planning Department has been running about 7 weeks for some time. She stated that this is not acceptable, either to our customers who should be able to expect timely service, or to the staff who is motivated to provide both timely and high quality service. Because of this, the Planning Department is requesting Council consideration to add an additional full-time staff position for the plan check function. Ms. Temple also recommended that consideration be given to adjusting the recovery rate to 100% rather than 50% of the fully loaded hourly rate for providing plan check services. This would offset a significant portion of the cost of the additional plan check position. She added that most planning and community development departments in the region charge an hourly rate for planning services which allows them to recover a higher percentage of the cost. Following discussion, Council directed staff to bring back a report at the next regular meeting that would add Planning Department staff and modifications to the ordinance regarding the percentage of the rate of recovery for plan check services. 3. STUDY SESSION ON CABLE TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS. Deputy City Manager Kiff pointed out that staff is recommending that Council form an ad hoc committee on cable television and telecommunications to address the issues and accomplish the tasks outlined in the staff report. Mr. Kiff reported that the municipal code relating to telecommunications is outdated and requires significant amendments before the City can enter into any effective franchise agreement or use permit with providers of cable television or wireless communication. He indicated that both the Comcast and Cox franchise agreements expire on January 27, 2002, and that the existing agreements, from about 1966, contain information and requirements that may have been superceded by Federal action in 1996. He indicated that the ad hoc committee should work with staff to update the City's cable television ordinance and create a separate telecommunications ordinance that addresses wireless services, street encroachment fees, City infrastructure use fees, and sites for antennas. Mr. Kiff reported that the Comcast and Cox franchise agreements will also need renegotiating once the ordinances are adopted. He pointed out that other cities have told them that it is "virtually impossible" to deny a franchise agreement to an existing provider who seeks a renewal unless the provider has seriously compromised service or has demonstrated an inability to provide the level of service expected by the community. He added that the cable lines, amplifiers, node infrastructure, etcetera (also known as the "plant ") that are in streets and on telephone wires are the property of the cable company, not the City. He emphasized that an important part of any franchise renewal is the preparation of a Community Needs Assessment. A Needs Assessment is an analysis, based on extensive public input, of the Volume 58 - Page 645 INDEX Cable TV and Telecommunications (42) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes October 24, 2000 television, high -speed data, service standard, and cable - related telecommunications needs of the community. The City needs to begin planning and convening this Needs Assessment right away so that it is completed in time for franchise renewal talks. Mr. Kiff reported that Comcast will soon be leaving Southern California after swapping its local customer base with Adelphia Communications. Therefore, residents in about 2 /3rds of Newport Beach will have a new cable television provider. He indicated that they plan to inquire with Comcast/Adelphia as to Adelphia's plans to communicate the transfer of service from Comcast. Further, they also plan to direct Comcast/Adelphia to provide critical information about pending transfers to subscribers in a timely manner, including local phone numbers and bill payment/service office information. , Mr. Kiff reported that residents have seen a series of significant cable rate increases and that they have been higher in recent years than the rate of inflation. He noted that there has been non - existent or modest price increases on the Limited Basic Tier (LBT) of channels (typically Channels 2 to 13) and indicated that local governments retain the ability to regulate this tier. He reported that, with the Cable Programming Services Tier (CPST) rate deregulation in March 1999, the City has no direct authority to review or regulate CPST rates. Mr. Kiff recommended that the ad hoc committee explain the City's regulatory ability, or lack thereof, to the community through the Community Needs Assessment process. Further, the ad hoc committee should also develop a Council policy relating to the manner in which the City reviews and approves requests for telecommunications infrastructure easements. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. ADJOURNMENT - 6:00 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on October 18, 2000, at 3:20 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 63 - Page 646 INDEX CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes DRAFT Regular Meeting October 24, 2000 - 7:00 p.m. INDEX - 6:00 p.m. [Refer to separate minutes] CLOSED SESSION - 6:00 p.m. CLOSED SESSION REPORT PRESENTED - None. RECESSED AND RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING ROLL CALL Present: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Absent: None Pledge of Allegiance - Council Member Debay. Invocation by Chief Chaplain George R. Vogel, VA Medical Center of Long Beach. Presentation of Proclamation by Mayor Noyes to thirteen - year -old Marlo Sciarra, designating her as a special citizen of Newport Beach. Ms. Sciarra was recently named National Champion for her age group in water ski racing. Ms. Sciarra's parents were also present for the presentation. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEM): • Mayor Noyes thanked Congressman Chris Cox for enabling a bill to pass through the House that will allocate $21 million to the Back Bay for dredging over the next twenty years. He stated that the bill still has to pass through the Senate and be signed by the President. Mayor Noyes also acknowledged Supervisor Tom Wilson for his role in working with Congressman Cox and his lobbying efforts. • Council Member Ridgeway pointed out that the $21 million is for the Federal portion of the super dredging that will take place in two years. • Mayor Noyes announced that the Upper Newport Bay Interpretive Center opened on October 14, 2000. He commended the County for the construction of the facility, which was done in such a way as to be sensitive to the residents and the environment. • As a follow -up to some comments made by Council Member O'Neil recently regarding criticism of the City Council and the way the City is being run, Mayor Pro Tern Adams stated that he is deeply troubled that Measure S, the Greenlight Volume 53 - Page 647 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 initiative, may pass on November 7, 2000. He stated that he agrees with the intent of the measure to limit traffic and density in the City, but that it is not the right way to accomplish those things. He stated that it is bad law and could be destructive to the City over time. Mayor Pro Tem Adams explained that the measure deals with the general plan amendment process, a process that is governed by the City Charter, City codes and the California Environmental Quality Act, as well as provisions and approval of the Coastal Commission. He stated that the process is arduous and equitable, and involves a tremendous amount of public participation. He pointed out that the measure has the potential to discourage participation in the process, because people will assume that a project will go to a vote of the people anyway. He added that the measure cannot stop the Dunes project. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that another problem with the measure is that it allows land use decisions to be influenced by the forces that take place in a political campaign. He concluded by stating that the general plan tool is important to cities, but may need to be amended as property owners make investments. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that Measure S could have a stagnating effect on the City. • Council Member Thomson pointed out that no single council member speaks for the entire City Council, except for the Mayor and only when authorized by the Council. He did, however, encourage everyone to. vote in the elections on November 7, 2000. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTES/ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. MINUTES OF THE ADJOURNED REGULAR AND REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 10, 2000. Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as written and order filed. 2. READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. Waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions under consideration, and direct City Clerk to read by title only. RESOLUTION FOR ADOPTION 3. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by City Manager Bludau. ORDINANCES FOR INTRODUCTION 4. MODIFICATION TO ADULT Introduce Ordinance No. 2000 -21 November 14, 2000. If adopted, or days from the date of adoption. ENTERTAINMENT ORDINANCE. and pass to second reading on dinance would become effective thirty 5. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. ORDINANCES FOR ADOPTION 6. ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 3.33 TO THE NEWPORT BEACH Volume 53 - Page 648 INDEX Ord 2000 -21 Adult Entertainment (27) Ord 2000 -17 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX Volume 53 - Page 649 MUNICIPAL CODE ENACTING AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Assessment District ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURAL CHAPTER. Adopt Ordinance Alternative No. 2000 -17 adding Chapter 3.33 to the NBMC giving the City authority to Procedures assess leased property. (89) 7. GPA 99 -3(C), ZONING AMENDMENT NO. 902 (PC NOS. 52 AND 53), Ord 2000 -18 /Ord 2000 -19 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 14: REVIEW OF A GPA 99 -3(C) /PCA 902/ PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, PREZONING, AND C -3382 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NECESSARY TO PROVIDE FOR Development ANNEXATION OF THE NEWPORT COAST/BIDGE AREA TO THE Agreement 14/ CITY. 1) Adopt Ordinance No. 2000 -18 approving Zoning Amendment Newport Coast/Ridge No. 902 (PC Nos. 52 and 53); and 2) adopt Ordinance No. 2000 -19 approving Area Annexation Development Agreement No. 14. (21/38/45) 8. MARINER'S MILE STRATEGIC VISION AND DESIGN FRAMEWORK Ord 2000 -20 /PCA 906 - AMENDMENT NO. 906. Adopt Ordinance No. 2000 -20 (Amendment Mariner's Mile No. 906). (94) CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 9. 2ND EXTENSION TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN C -1772 LEGION POST 291. Authorize the Mayor to enter into a 2nd Lease American Legion Amendment that extends the current operating lease with the American Lease Agreement Legion Post 291 for the marina and clubhouse at 215 15th Street for one (38) additional year to March 15, 2002. 10. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. 11. CITY HALL ELECTRICAL AND AIR CONDITIONING UPGRADES C -3318 (C -3318) - APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER. 1) Approve the revised BA -010 plans and specification for the project; 2) approve a $20,000 change order to City Hall Bay Shore Electric to change the existing electrical panel installation from a Electrical & single -phase system to a three -phase system, and install additional panels as Air Conditioning required by the Building Department; and 3) approve a budget amendment Upgrades (BA -010) to appropriate $20,000 from the unappropriated General Fund (38140) balance to Account No. 7011- C3120363 to cover the cost of the change order. 12. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. 13. POLICE DEPARTMENT MISSION CRITICAL SYSTEMS MASTER C -3380 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT. Authorize the City Manager to approve Police Department and execute the Master Maintenance Agreement between PRC Public Sector, Computer Aided Inc. and the Police Department for a Computer Aided Dispatch System and Dispatch/Records Records Management System (hardware and software), for a period covering Management Systems March 16, 2000 through June 30, 2005. (38) 14. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. Volume 53 - Page 649 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX V AV 11V 1 \V 15. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA FOR OCTOBER 19, 2000. Planning Commission Receive and file. (68) 16. BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A NEW FILING BA -007 SYSTEM. Approve BA -007 transferring $26,000 from the General Fund Human Resources fund balance to the City Manager -Human Resources capital outlay account, Filing System 0320 -9000. (40/66) 17. BUDGET AMENDMENT (BA -009) IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000.60 - A BA -009 DEPOSIT OF A DONATION OF $37,255 FROM THE NEWPORT Library Donation BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION AND A TRANSFER OF (40/50) $12,7456.60 PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED FROM THE NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION THAT WAS HELD OVER FROM THE 2000 DISTINGUISHED SPEAKER LECTURE SERIES, TO BE USED FOR THE 2001 DISTINGUISHED SPEAKER LECTURE SERIES. Approve BA -009. 18. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. 19. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION ON General Plan Update AIRPORT AREA PLANNING. Direct the committee and staff to include (68) the Airport Area in the Citywide General Plan update, and to prepare a specific plan for the Airport Area concurrently with the General Plan update. 20. Item removed from the Consent Calendar by a member of the audience. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Adams to approve the Consent Calendar, except for those items removed (3, 5, 10, 12, 14, 18 and 20), and noting the clarification by City Clerk Harkless of the effective date for Item Nos. 4 and 5. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 3. REVISIONS TO RESOLUTION NO. 98 -17 REGARDING Res 2000 -90 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AFFAIRS CITIZENS ADVISORY EQAC COMMITTEE. (24) Assistant City Manager Wood suggested that a change in the language be made to Section C of the rules. She explained that the council members do not have a vote and, therefore, should not be counted towards a quorum. Volume 53 - Page 650 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 Motion by Mayor Noyes to adopt Resolution No. 2000 -90 to amend the membership, rules and purpose and responsibilities of the committee, noting the change in Rule C to read, "A quorum shall consist of a majority of the active members of the Committee, not counting the Council Members ". The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 6. AMENDMENTS TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 12.56 - BICYCLES - REGISTRATION AND REGULATIONS. City Manager Bludau stated that the item was placed on the agenda at the request of Council Member Ridgeway, due to his concern about pedicabs on the boardwalk. City Manager Bludau stated that staff is recommending that the vehicles be prohibited in the City for safety reasons. City Attorney Burnham stated that the prohibition only applies to public streets and property from Coast Highway towards the ocean, and not to areas inland of Coast Highway. He explained that the reason is that the streets on the peninsula are smaller, narrower and more congested. Darren Etem, 601 E. Balboa Blvd., owner of Balboa Bikes N Beach Stuff, asked what the findings were that set forth the basis for the proposed amendments. He stated that he has rented surreys for four years and has never been made aware of such findings. Referring to Section 1.0 of the proposed ordinance, Mr. Etem asked if surreys had been involved in more traffic incidents than other vehicles and noted he has never had an incident with the renting of surreys in his four years of doing business. He added that the exclusion of surreys from Newport Beach will undoubtedly persuade families to go to a community that does offer the activity. Mr. Etem concluded by stating that he was never told about the danger and hazards of surreys when he opened his business in the City. He stated that the proposal, if passed, will impact the well being of he and his family. INDEX Council Member Ridgeway asked Mr. Etem what other jurisdictions in the coastal area allow surreys, particularly in Orange County. Mr. Etem stated that he was aware of Huntington Beach allowing surreys on their boardwalk, and recently learned that they are actually widening their boardwalks. Mr. Etem added that his surrey renters must sign a form indicating that they understand that surreys are only allowed on the streets in Newport Beach. Per Council Member Ridgeway's question, Mr. Etem stated that he does not rent to people who do not speak English and cannot understand the paperwork. Mr. Etem added that renters must also be at least eighteen years old. Council Member Ridgeway confirmed with Mr. Etem that he has four surreys in his inventory and they are worth $15,000. Jack Pentlarge, 802 E. Yanonali, Santa Barbara, Wheel Fun Rentals, a Volume 53 - Page 651 Bicycle Regulations (70) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX surrey distributor, stated that a small percentage of their surreys are sold in the Newport Beach vicinity. Mr. Pentlarge asked that the City Council approve a sixty -day extension for the item. He stated that he has been in business for thirteen years and has worked with cities to develop programs on how to make the surrey a safe vehicle to rent. He stated that his company would like to help teach the rental companies in Newport Beach how to properly rent the vehicles. He stated that his company has been successful in many cities. Council Member Ridgeway asked for information on what is taught. Mr. Pentlarge stated that rules and regulations are placed on the vehicles, individuals under eighteen years of age are restricted from driving the surrey, they supervise and police rental vehicle operators on weekends and holidays and they instruct the operators on how to give the instructions to the renters. Council Member Ridgeway asked how the rules and regulations are enforced. Mr. Pentlarge stated that, in some instances, the parents have been fined. Council Member Ridgeway confirmed with Mr. Pentlarge that it might possibly require the Police Department to follow through on the enforcement. Mr. Pentlarge added that it's proper and clear instruction to the renters that will usually deter any illegal activity. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the City already has an ordinance that disallows the vehicles on the boardwalk, and that enforcement is difficult because the Police Department has other issues to deal with. Additionally, many of the citations are given to foreigners who never show up following the issuance of the citation. Mayor Pro Tem Adams confirmed with Mr. Pentlarge that his business is to sell the vehicles to the rental companies. Mr. Pentlarge added that the majority of their sales are to Disney World. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that if the City wants to increase revenue, it should not hesitate to issue citations. He added that the rental companies should be able to provide information on how to track down the individuals that rent the surreys. Mr. Hildreth stated that the Police Department has plenty of manpower to enforce the ordinance. He concluded by stating the surreys on the streets would actually slow traffic down on the peninsula. Joe Klure, owner of a surrey business at 207 Palm Street, stated that he agreed with many of the comments made by the previous business owners. He asked if there would be any reparation made to the business owners, if the amendment passes, to assist them with loss of income or relocation. City Manager Bludau stated that staff is not making such a recommendation. Mr. Klure stated that he has been operating his business for over seven years and has never had an incident of injury or accident. He concluded by stating that previous speakers have already discussed many of the other issues he was going to bring up. Volume 63 - Page 652 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX Council Member Debay asked about the increased complaints received by the City, as mentioned in the staff report. City Attorney Burnham responded by stating that the Risk Manager has processed claims involving surrey cycles. Mayor Pro Tem Adams confirmed that there are three operators of surreys in the City. He pointed out that two of the three have reported at the current meeting that they have had no incidents. Mayor Pro Tem Adams suggested that the responsible business owners should not be penalized. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the surrey operators may have no reported incidents, but it doesn't mean that there have been no incidents. He stated that the people that are hurt are those on the boardwalk and they often go to Hoag Hospital or home for treatment. He added that the boardwalks are very narrow. Public Works Director Webb confirmed that the boardwalks are ten to twelve feet wide. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the surreys are probably 3 1/2 feet wide. He admitted that the enforcement of the surreys on the boardwalk is not done very well. He stated that the Police Department has other priorities, but he knows that the people who live on the boardwalk are affected. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the proposed amendment may be the solution, but added that the findings mentioned in the report need to be provided before taking such a drastic step. He suggested that possibly the industry should be given the opportunity to solve the problem first. He asked if other solutions had been sought prior to the proposed amendment. Council Member Ridgeway agreed that the findings should be provided, but that, regardless, surreys are a problem and the operators do not enforce the ordinance prohibiting surreys on the boardwalk. He stated that he wouldn't mind the issue being brought back to the City Council, but he knows the solution will be the recommended action. City Attorney Burnham added that enforcement of surreys on the boardwalk is a problem but that if it is enforced, the surreys will go onto the streets. He stated that the streets on the peninsula are narrow. He did confirm that additional information and findings could be provided, and that his office could meet with the operators. Council Member Glover stated that she would like to see all of the information received by the City on the issue. She stated that sometimes the verbal testimony isn't backed up by what is really happening, and that it would only be fair to be presented with the findings. Alfieri Schinaia, surrey business owner, stated that he would lose everything if he were to lose his business. He stated that his surrey business allows him to pay his rent and put his daughter through school. He stated that the surrey rental business helps the City by providing an activity used by the tourists. Mayor Noyes confirmed with Mr. Schinaia that he has six or seven surreys in his business. Volume 63 - Page 653 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to continue the item for sixty days; and direct staff to provide more information. It was noted earlier by City Clerk Harkless that if adopted, the ordinance would become effective thirty days from the date of adoption. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if the industry could also be given the opportunity to look at an alternative solution. City Attorney Burnham stated that he could collect the names of those that spoke at the current meeting and schedule a meeting to discuss alternative solutions. Mayor Pro Tem Adams suggested that if the industry can't make it work, then the proposed amendment could be reconsidered. Council Member Ridgeway agreed to include the suggestion in his motion. Mayor Noyes agreed that the people are in business and the City should be sensitive to their concerns. The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 10. DESIGN OF IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE INTERSECTION OF C -3369 JAMBOREE ROAD AND MACARTHUR BOULEVARD (C -8869) - BA -008 APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH Jamboree & MacArthur KFM ENGINEERING. Intersection Improvements City Manager Bludau stated that the professional services agreement with (38140) KFM Engineering, Inc. is for approximately $93,000 and pertains to a capital improvement program which includes the widening of MacArthur Boulevard. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that work being done on Bayside Drive is being done prior to the undergrounding of utilities. He stated that the City should consider the other things that might also be planned in the future at Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard. He cited an example of Coast Highway and Jamboree Road being redone three times in three years. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to approve a Professional Services Agreement with KFM Engineering, Inc. of Foothill Ranch for professional engineering services for a contract price of $93,285; authorize the transfer of $37,000 from 7251- C5100584 to 7284- C5100584 to correctly identify the funds as a component of the Measure M Combined Transportation Funding Program (BA -008); and authorize a budget amendment (BA -008) to recognize an additional $23,000 available to the City from the Measure M Combined Transportation Funding Program. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Volume 58 - Page 654 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 12. BALBOA BOULEVARD RECONSTRUCTION MAIN TO "G" STREET (C -3176) - COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE. City Manager Bludau stated that the project was completed and staff is recommending that the City Council accept the work. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, asked what overcoat was incurred with the project. City Manager Bludau stated that change orders totaled $76, 067.92. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to accept the work; authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion; authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials bond 35 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of the Civil Code; and release the Faithful Performance Bond six months after Council acceptance. The motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 14. MAINTENANCE DREDGING PERMIT - SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF HARBOR SEDIMENTS. City Manager Bludau stated that the Coastal Commission required that the City complete the sediment testing. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that the maintenance and dredging permits of The Grand Canal did not include analysis of the eel grass. He asked if the sediment analysis would take this into consideration. Council Member Ridgeway stated that there is no testing for The Grand Canal, and that the analysis is being limited to the south side of Lido Isle, west side of Lido Channel, the Rhine Channel, south side of Balboa Island and around Linda Isle. Mayor Noyes further confirmed that it's the sampling that has to be done pursuant to the Coastal Commission in order for the City to get its master dredging permit. Council Member Ridgeway added that it has nothing to do with eel grass and only includes bio- assays studies. Mr. Hildreth asked why The Grand Canal wasn't included. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the Coastal Commission determined the areas that needed to be tested. Volume 53 - Page 655 INDEX C -3176 Balboa Boulevard Reconstruction (38) C -3381 Sampling & Analysis Harbor Sediments (38) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 Motion by Council Member O'Neil to authorize the Mayor to approve a Professional Services Agreement with MEC Analytical Systems, Inc., Carlsbad, to complete a Sampling and Analysis of Newport Harbor Sediments in the amount of $99,710. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 18. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000 -3 - REQUEST TO INITIATE AMENDMENTS TO THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN AS FOLLOWS: A) 4343 VON KARMAN AVENUE (KOLL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY): A PROPOSAL TO INCREASE THE DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION FOR KOLL CENTER NEWPORT OFFICE SITE BY 2,160 SQUARE FEET TO ALLOW AN EXPANSION OF THE SECOND FLOOR OF AN EXISTING BUILDING WITHIN THE TWO STORY LOBBY; AND B) ONE UPPER NEWPORT PLAZA (O HILL PARTNERS): A PROPOSAL TO INCREASE THE DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION FOR NEWPORT PLACE BLOCKS G & H (NEWPORT PLACE PC INDUSTRIAL SITE 3A) TO ALLOW AN APPROXIMATE 440 SQ. FT. ADDITION TO AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING FOR A FILE STORAGE ROOM. Planning Director Temple stated that the item is one of three annual events to initiate general plan amendments, as set forth by council policy. She stated that the current event includes two items, which are fairly minor requests in the airport area. She stated that approval by the City Council of the staff recommendation would not constitute approval of the projects, but would start the process and allow the applicants to file all follow -up applications, prior to public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council. Council Member Debay stated that at the City Council meeting of October 10, 2000, she pulled the item to clarify what the effect of Measure S would have on the projects, if it were currently in effect. Planning Director Temple confirmed that staff has determined that six of the City's statistical areas have reached certain thresholds based on general plan amendments that have occurred over the past ten years. She stated that based on the requirements of Measure S, both of the projects would require a vote of the citizens. City Attorney Burnham stated that certain assumptions were made prior to the analysis done by The Planning Center. He stated that one of the assumptions was that traffic density and intensity of a proposed general plan amendment would be added to those that have occurred in that statistical area for the prior ten years. He stated that this assumption combined with the requirements established for Measure S would require a vote of the citizens on both of the projects before the City Council at the current meeting. Volume 53 - Page 656 11013 GPA 2000 -3 Koll Center/ Newport Place (45) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 Allan Beek, 2007 Highland Drive, stated that 2,160 square feet is below the measure's threshold of 40,000 square feet and, therefore, the project would not require a vote of the citizens. He stated that when considering the cumulative effect of Measure S, the project would still not require a vote of the people, according to The Planning Center's analysis that the accumulation would have been 23,000 square feet for that statistical area. Mr. Beek stated that Measure S provides that the City Council will adopt the guidelines for the implementation of Measure S. He stated that he feels that the City Council will adopt guidelines that will produce the minimum number of elections. Motion by Council Member O'Neil to initiate the amendments to the General Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None 20. 323 MARINE AVENUE (OLD BALBOA ISLAND FIRE STATION) - PROPOSED COMMUNITY CENTER - CITY PARTICIPATION. City Manager Bludau stated that the Balboa Island Museum and Historical Society is requesting that the City contribute towards the purchase of the old Balboa Island Fire Station property. He stated that the staff recommendation is to allocate up to $350,000, once the Society has received binding pledges in the amount of $650,000. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that the residents of Balboa Island and Little Balboa Island understand that the structure cannot be sold because it is structurally unsound. He asked if the City was aware of this. Mayor Noyes stated that the City was aware of it. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to approve, in concept, the acquisition of the Property by the Society for purposes of creating a community center /museum; direct staff to prepare an agreement that would obligate the City Council to contribute up to $350,000 to the Society subject to certain terms and conditions including: the Society has funds and/or binding pledges amounting to $650,000; the City Council's allocation of $350,000 in the then current budget for purposes of funding the community center /museum; and the right of the City to ensure that the property continues to be used as a community center /museum unless the City consents to a different use; and direct staff to prepare a budget amendment consistent with the funding commitment specified in Section 2. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Volume 53 - Page 657 INDEX C -3386 323 Marine Avenue Community Center (Old Balboa Island Fire Station) (38) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 Abstain: None Absent: None PUBLIC COMMENTS Ernest Lee, 14591 Laurel Avenue, Irvine, California Public Interest Research Group ( CALPIRG), stated that CALPIRG is working to endorse the Zero - Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Program, which would require car manufacturers to have 10% of their new fleet cars sold in California to be zero - emission by 2003. He asked the City to endorse the ZEV Program by writing a letter to Governor Davis. Mayor Noyes asked that Mr. Lee leave his information and discuss the request with the City Manager. W. R. Dildine, P. O. Box 1195, Lompoc, stated that he owns property at 320 E. Balboa Blvd. and is impressed with the work being done in the Central Balboa Peninsula area. He stated that he is, however, bothered by the telephone company building. He stated that it has weeds, is an eyesore and appears to be abandoned. He suggested that the City initiate written communication with the phone company and copy the individual Public Utilities Commission (PUC) members. Mr. Dildine stated that another remedy might be to work with an organization, who could make it a community project, Mayor Noyes stated that Tom Hyans, President of the Central Newport Beach Community Association, has attempted to make contact with the phone company. Council Member Ridgeway additionally reported that he has personally met with the phone company. He stated that elevation studies are being done and various ideas are being discussed. He stated that he has met with the facilities manager for the phone company and they have agreed to cleanup the property. Council Member Ridgeway stated that he has been remiss in following up on what has been done and thanked Mr. Dildine for commenting on the subject. Mr. Dildine suggested that written communication copying the PUC should still be sent. Mr. Lee stated that, when he spoke earlier, he forgot to mention that the ZEV Program has passed the Air Resources Board, unanimously. He stated that Governor Davis should be making his decision shortly after the November 7, 2000, election. Jim Hildreth, 120 The Grand Canal, stated that the audio in the rebroadcast of the October 10, 2000, City Council meeting was garbled. He also commented on the police officers that were present at the meeting and hoped they were there for security reasons and not for intimidation. Mr. Hildreth thanked the City Attorney for trying to have the platform with steps allowed for residential pier #80100011. He stated that he does not agree with having standard drawing #603 removed and a City - installed structure put in its place. He stated that he and his family will not be held liable for any injuries from the City's action. Mr. Hildreth additionally commented on Volume 58 - Page 658 INDEX CALPIRG (28) City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX statements made by City staff and City Council regarding a moratorium and enforcement. PUBLIC HEARINGS 21. BALBOA PENINSULA SIGN REGULATIONS. Ord 2000 -22 PCA 907 Assistant City Manager Wood stated that new sign regulations for the Balboa Peninsula peninsula were identified as a high priority by the City Council when the Sign Regulations Balboa Peninsula Planning Study was presented a couple years prior. She (94) stated that Urban Design Studio was selected as the firm to assist the City with preparing the new regulations. She stated that they were selected because they felt that the regulations should recognize the area's historical and eclectic nature, and they were also familiar with outreach methods. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that the process was begun with a visual preference survey, where residents and businesses were given the opportunity to vote on various signs. She stated that the responses were used a great deal in developing the regulations. She added that a Steering Committee was also utilized in looking at and editing the draft regulations. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that the regulations were then discussed at a public workshop and an Ad Hoc Committee to Promote the Revitalization of the Balboa Peninsula (PROP) meeting, followed by public hearings at the Planning Commission and, now, the City Council. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that it is proposed that the regulations be adopted as an overlay district, which would mean that they would apply only to the Balboa Peninsula. Additionally, she stated that an amortization program is being proposed. She stated that the amortization program would follow state law with regards to allowing fifteen years for current signs, even if they are nonconforming, and would also provide some financial assistance for those that replace their signs sooner. Assistant City Manager Wood introduced Mark Brodeur of Urban Design Studios. Mr. Brodeur stated that he was happy to be present at the current meeting to present the new regulations. He stated that it has taken awhile and referred to ordinances written in the 1960's that were applied to cities, Citywide. Mr. Brodeur stated that the peninsula, for example, should not include signs that you would find on a roadway with vehicles traveling at higher speeds. Mr. Brodeur stated that approximately 2 1/2 years ago, a process was begun to create an ordinance that encourages creative, fun and well designed signs. He stated that the ordinance also recognizes that many of the businesses on the peninsula are small and independently owned. He stated that a new process was also created to look at signs that are possibly prohibited elsewhere in the City, but would work well on the peninsula. Using a PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Brodeur stated that signs that will be prohibited on the peninsula include internally illuminated can signs, which are plastic cabinets with florescent lights behind. He stated that other signs that will be disallowed include inflated display signs and vehicle signs. Volume 53 - Page 659 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX Mr. Brodeur showed examples of these signs as well as signs that will be allowed, which include ground signs, roof signs, wall signs, directories, projecting and under canopy signs, awning signs and window signs. In addition to what signs are permitted and what signs are prohibited, Mr. Brodeur stated that a series of design guidelines was also written in an attempt to help the individual storeowners and to ensure that it works with the aesthetics of the peninsula. He stated that the design guidelines include guidelines for color, materials, legibility and illumination. Mr. Brodeur stated that the creative sign program encourages signs that provide unique inventiveness or spirit for the peninsula. It allows business owners to request approval for a sign permit that may not fit all of the exact standards and permitted uses. It uses a variance -type process for signs that meet criteria for design, contextual and architectural features. Mr. Brodeur stated that an amortization program has been used successfully by other cities. It sets a horizon year, of usually fifteen years, when all nonconforming signs must be removed. He stated that the sign amortization help, or incentive, program uses funds to buy down the cost for the replacement of the nonconforming signs. Mr. Brodeau explained how the incentives to participate are greater in the earlier years of the program. Per Council Member Glover's inquiry, Assistant City Manager Wood explained that the item was not budgeted as part of the overall capital project, but was budgeted for as its own capital project. Council Member Ridgeway stated his support for the program, but added that he is opposed to roof signs and thought that they had been discussed. Mr. Brodeur recalled that roof signs were kept in the prohibited category, but would be eligible for the creative sign program. Assistant City Manager Wood additionally clarified that roof signs are not permitted by parcels using ground signs and are only permitted through the creative sign program. Council Member Ridgeway stated his concern for Cannery Village, but agreed that it would work through the creative sign program. Mayor Noyes opened the public hearing. Tom Hyans, President of the Central Newport Beach Community Association, thanked the City Council for the opportunity to participate in the program. He stated that it has been a long, worthwhile process with a lot of public input. Mr. Hyans added, however, that the amortization program of fifteen years seems too long and he'd like to see it accelerated a bit. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the amortization program is relatively quick, explaining that the paid incentives are only offered during the first five to six years. W. R. Dildine, P. O. Box 1195, Lompoc, property owner of 320 E. Balboa Blvd., stated that he is concerned about the nonconforming uses of signs on the peninsula. He stated that his property is zoned as R -2, but that since the Central Balboa Specific Plan has gone into effect, signs have been added and Volume 53 -Page 660 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX the signs across from his property are obnoxious. Mr. Dildine stated that R -2 properties and nonconforming uses of signs should be addressed in the Specific Plan. He stated that some of the signs in the 300 and 400 block of Balboa Boulevard shouldn't even need to be on all night, and particularly in a residential area. Mayor Noyes asked if hours of illumination was discussed in the ordinance. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that it hadn't been addressed. Council Member Ridgeway stated that possibly the amortization period should be shortened to ten years. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that State Law requires fifteen. She added, however, that a fairly large percentage of signs are not allowed under the current ordinance and code enforcement could begin on those immediately. She stated that enforcement was held up until the new sign ordinance was adopted. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if anyone had been notified of nonconforming signs yet. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that they have not been notified pending approval of the new regulations and another survey that will then be conducted. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if the hours of illumination had been discussed. Mr. Brodeur stated that he has written about twenty ordinances and has never had the issue of hours of operation included. He stated that the situation presented is unique in that a dwelling unit is so close to a business. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that the signs that are a problem at night are probably going to be those that are nonconforming anyway. Council Member Ridgeway stated that most retailers like to keep their lights on late, but he does think that the described situation is unique because R -2 is located so closely to commercial. Senior Planner Patrick Alford stated that the existing sign ordinance does have a section dealing with sign illumination, but that it addresses brightness only, and not hours of operation. Mayor Noyes stated that the hours of illumination should be considered. Mr. Dildine stated that the situation he was discussing involves two R-2 properties. Additionally, he asked who receives the surveys that were mentioned earlier. He stated that he has received little information on the topic. Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Noyes closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to introduce Ordinance No. 2000 -22 approving Amendment 907 and pass to second reading on November 14, 2000. Council Member Ridgeway reminded everyone that hundreds of hours were put into the effort by numerous citizens on the peninsula. He stated that it will most likely be a guide for future overlays in the City. He complimented the citizens and staff. Volume 53 - Page 661 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX The motion carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None CONTINUED BUSINESS 22. CONVERSION OF SAN JOAQUIN RESERVOIR (SJR) AND 1996 San Joaquin Reservoir BASIC INTEGRATED RE -USE PROJECT AGREEMENT ( BIRPA) (89) (contd. from 9/26/00). Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that the item was discussed at the City Council meeting of September 26, 2000. He reminded everyone that the San Joaquin Reservoir is a 3,000 acre -foot reservoir located just outside the City limits between the Harbor Ridge and Rivage communities. Additionally, he stated that at the September meeting, the City Council directed staff to allow the Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee (EQAC) the opportunity to review the Mitigated Negative Declaration on the reservoir's conversion to a reclaimed water facility and to have the chairman present a report to the City Council on their findings. Additionally, it was requested that the City work with the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) to extend the comment period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration, work with EQAC on the Committee's comments and work with the Regional Water Quality Control Board on the Board's ability to adopt or change a National Pollutant Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES) order, Order 94 -22. Lastly, the City Council directed the City Attorney to meet with the IRWD Attorney regarding a binding agreement that would prohibit reclaimed water discharges into the bay. Since that meeting, Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that he and Planning Director Temple have worked with EQAC on their comments, and that those were included with the staff report. IRWD agreed to have the comment period extended an additional two weeks. Additionally, he stated that the City communicated with the Regional Board. In regards to a binding agreement, staff was made aware of the 1996 Basic Integrated Re -Use Project Agreement ( BIRPA). He stated that BIRPA is a three -party agreement signed by IRWD, the City and the Orange County Water District (OCWD). He stated that it has a concluding section that directs the City and IRWD to use their best efforts to reach agreement on ways to beneficially use reclaimed water without the discharge of the water into San Diego Creek or Newport Bay. He stated that BIRPA bound the parties to do several things and if all of these things were done, it required that best efforts be made to reach a point where IRWD would never have to discharge into the bay. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that the City Attorney and an outside attorney specializing in water issues both confirmed that BIRPA is binding. Deputy City Manager Kiff additionally reminded everyone that it has not been proposed to discharge water from the San Joaquin Reservoir, but that at the September meeting, Order 94 -22 was discussed, which allows discharges during large rain events from a reservoir other than San Joaquin. Volume 58 - Page 662 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 Deputy City Manager Kiff stated Order 94 -22, but the order cannot be the region's basin plan is completed. that IRWD has applied to renew approved by the Regional Board until Deputy City Manager Kiff concluded by stating that BIRPA combined with the conversion of the reservoir provides the win/win situation that the City has been looking for. Robert Hawkins, Chairman of EQAC, thanked the City Council for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. He stated that the comments are directed to IRWD and have already been released to them. In summation, Mr. Hawkins stated that EQAC feels that the Negative Declaration is insufficient to support the findings. He stated that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is necessary because the Negative Declaration does not meet the legal standards. Mr. Hawkins stated that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a Negative Declaration show that there are clearly no significant impacts. He stated that this standard has not been reached with IRWD's Negative Declaration. Mr. Hawkins stated that one of the major impacts is that the project more than doubles the capacity of the reclaimed water system. He stated that this would free up potable water supplies, which means that the project threatens to have growth inducing impacts. He stated that the document does not even attempt to analyze this potential impact. Additionally, Mr. Hawkins stated that some of the impacts recognized in the Negative Declaration have mitigation and studies deferred. He stated that the issue of seepage is an example of this. He stated that seepage is addressed as a potential impact in the document, but that the extent of the impacts and the mitigation of these impacts have been deferred to a later time. Lastly, Mr. Hawkins stated that the Negative Declaration states that if an impact is short -term, it won't be significant. He stated that, again, EQAC disagrees with this. Council Member Thomson asked for a clarification of the seepage issue and the makeup of the reservoir and dam. Mr. Hawkins stated that the seepage issue is not clear, but that the potential is there. He stated that EQAC's problem is that the mitigation of any potential seepage is not addressed. INDEX Mike Hoolihan, IRWD, Project Manager for the conversion, stated that the San Joaquin Reservoir is clay lined and designed to have little seepage, but that there will always be some seepage. He stated that the reservoir has a drainage system built behind the clay liners and the dam has a barrier that does not allow seepage. Council Member Thomson asked how much seepage is expected. Mr. Hoolihan stated that IRWD went back to Metropolitan Water District's (MWD) records and found that it has reached 150 gallons per minute. He stated that it was unclear if this was just reservoir seepage or if it included neighboring properties draining into the storm drains on the reservoir site. He added that IRWD had originally planned to build a structure that would capture the seepage, but a CEQA consultant advised them that the action Volume 53 - Page 663 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX might result in a negative impact because of the habitats in the stream areas below the reservoir. Council Member Thomson confirmed with Mr. Hoolihan that the San Joaquin Reservoir's capacity is 3,000 acre feet, or approximately one billion gallons. Mayor Pro Tem Adams mentioned Defend the Bay's attorney's opinion that the City of Newport Beach is the responsible agency, making it inappropriate for the City to approve the sale of its share of the reservoir prior to required environmental clearance. He confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that staff now concurs with that opinion and has made recommendations accordingly. He stated that he also consulted with Clem Shuts, an environmental lawyer. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that he has made five recommended actions. In summary, he stated that these include that the City Council support, in concept, the conversion of the San Joaquin Reservoir to a reclaimed water storage facility provided that the facility is operated correctly, and authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to execute all documents necessary to consummate the sale of the City's ownership interests in the San Joaquin Reservoir to IRWD when the environmental document for the project has been certified and the City has complied with its CEQA obligations as a responsible agency. Council Member Glover confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that the environmental document certification would include an EIR, if needed. City Attorney Burnham added that the City, as a responsible agency, has various powers and responsibilities, depending upon the nature and type of environmental documentation that IRWD prepares. Council Member Glover additionally confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that the City's primary responsibility as a responsible agency is to comment on the EIR, if one is prepared. He added that if the City finds that the EIR is inadequate, it has the obligation to litigate the adequacy of the document. Deputy City Manager Kiff continued listing the recommended actions and stated that they include the appointment of Council Members Ridgeway and Debay to meet with representatives of IRWD to address and resolve any remaining issues regarding the long -term "no discharge" scenario referenced in Section 6 of BIRPA, and assuming completion of the sale of the City's interest in the San Joaquin Reservoir, directing the City Manager to use the proceeds to implement provisions of BIRPA. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that a fifth recommendation, not included in the staff report, is to find that EQAC's comments, including the recommendation that IRWD prepare a full EIR, be deemed as the City's official comments. Clint Hoose, President, Harbor Ridge Homeowners Association, urged the City Council to support the staff recommendations that have been presented. He stated that the residents in the area are ready to have the blue water view returned. He stated that IRWD has agreed to involve Harbor Ridge in the planning, design and operation of the reservoir. Robert Caustin, 471 Old Newport Blvd., Defend the Bay, stated that if the City Council goes forward with the staff recommendation, they are saying Volume 53 - Page 664 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX that they don't care about the impacts of the project. He stated that the City Council may have the opportunity to challenge certain parts of the EIR in the future, but that IRWD will be in charge of certifying the EIR. He cited an example of an EIR that IRWD approved in 1996 that was detrimental to Newport Bay. Mr. Caustin stated that the reservoir conversion has many problems. He specifically mentioned the seepage issue. He also referenced the expiration date of BIRPA, which is in approximately eleven years. He stated that this does not provide for a "no discharge" scenario in the long- term. Mr. Caustin stated that he has been fighting IRWD's plans to dump treated sewage into Newport Bay for five years. Per Mayor Noyes' request, City Attorney Burnham clarified that the term of BIRPA is to 2011, but it does not limit the term of the "no discharge" agreement. Additionally, City Attorney Burnham pointed out that the project is not a project involving the discharge of reclaimed water. Mr. Caustin stated that the seepage of the water will eventually make its way to Newport Bay. Council Member Debay stated that the reclaimed water will eventually be used to water landscaping. Mr. Caustin stated that reclaimed water is high in nutrients and would be a detrimental influence to Newport Bay. Council Member Debay stated the reclaimed water will exit the San Joaquin Reservoir through pipes and be used to water landscaping. Mr. Caustin stated that there are still problems with the project. Council Member Debay stated that landscape watering could also be considered seepage since it goes into the ground. She asked for a clarification of the difference between the seepage from the reservoir and the seepage from the landscape watering. Mr. Caustin explained that the root systems of plants absorb some of the nutrients from the water when it is used for landscape watering. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he was also concerned about the seepage issue and will be interested in seeing how it is addressed in the EIR, but that he also understands that IRWD has the ability to collect the seepage and return it to the reservoir. City Attorney Burnham stated that he also understands that IRWD has the ability to do that, but that it presents another problem by drying up the riparian area that exists below the dam. He stated that it is an issue that needs to be addressed by IRWD in an EIR. In reference to the recommended actions, Mayor Pro Tem Adams suggested that the EIR should come back to the City Council and that the authorization for the sale of the reservoir should not occur until it is determined by the City that the EIR is adequate. Additionally, he suggested that EQAC should have the opportunity to review the EIR. City Attorney Burnham stated that a responsibility of a responsible agency would be to review the EIR and agreed that Mayor Pro Tem Adams' suggestions could be included in the recommended actions. Council Member Glover stated that an EIR should be prepared, with mitigation measures in place ahead of time. Secondly, Council Member Glover asked if the City Attorney attempted to work with IRWD on Volume 53 - Page 665 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX obtaining an MOU. Deputy City Manager Kiff stated that staff did meet with IRWD, but that the City believes that Section 6 of the 1996 agreement is as strong as anything that could be obtained in an MOU. Council Member Glover stated that she would still like to see IRWD concur. Jack Skinner, 1724 Highland Drive, stated that he spoke at the meeting on September 26, 2000, and, at that time, was concerned about reaching a binding agreement with IRWD. He stated that the use of reclaimed water in Southern California is important and that the San Joaquin Reservoir makes sense for the storage of reclaimed water. Mr. Skinner began a review of the Green Acres Project by stating that in 1996, Don Owens of the OCWD Board of Directors informed him that a direct line from IRWD was planned so that reclaimed water could be moved to Fountain Valley. Mr. Skinner stated that on July 17, 1996, OCWD, the County Sanitation District of Orange County (CSDOC), the City and IRWD got together and made the agreement called BIRPA. He stated that the involved parties had their doubts that all of the requirements for the agreement would be achievable. He stated that the agreements and the tasks that were required of each of the agencies seemed insurmountable. Mr. Skinner reported, however, that approximately two months ago, the last part of the agreement was completed. He stated that it is now possible to say that Section 6 of the agreement is consummated and provides a binding agreement for a "no discharge" scenario into the bay. Mr. Skinner stated that he is now more comfortable with the reservoir conversion project. He stated that he'd like to see BIRPA effective for a longer period of time, but that the water issues are changing and there is time to work out a continued agreement for "no discharge ". Council Member Glover confirmed with Mr. Skinner that IRWD's legal counsel should agree that Section 6 is in place because all of the requirements of the agreement have been completed. Council Member Glover again asked that the City Attorney meet with the IRWD attorney and get something on paper that they agree with that opinion. Mr. Skinner stated that it didn't look like Order 94 -22 was going to accomplish the goal for a "no discharge" scenario, but that Section 6 does and it was only recently discovered that the requirements of the agreement had been met. Council Member Debay thanked Mr. Skinner for his time and caring. Additionally, she confirmed with Mr. Skinner that he supports the recommended actions. Jim Magstadt, 40 Vienna, resident of Harbor Ridge, stated his support for the recommended actions. He stated that the residents in the community have been very patient as they've watched a beautiful amenity disappear. He stated that the City Council's support would turn a deteriorating area into a positive amenity for the community, at no cost to the City. Mr. Hoose stated that staffs second recommendation should address the concerns of Council Members Glover and Ridgeway regarding EIR qualifications. He stated that the law is clear, administered by the State, and requires that IRWD has to comply with the ordinance. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he doesn't want to do anything that will Volume 53 - Page 666 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 delay the project, but the City is the one asking for the EIR and the City should review the final certified EIR before making a decision on the sale of the reservoir. He stated that the second recommendation is not saying that. Mr. Caustin stated that eleven years is not long enough and he agrees with Council Member Glover's recommendation. Motion by Council Member Ridgeway to support, in concept, the conversion of the San Joaquin Reservoir to a reclaimed water storage facility provided that the facility is operated in a manner that reduces or eliminates any potential adverse odor or aesthetic impact from the operation of the facility on adjacent residential communities; authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to execute all documents necessary to consummate the sale of the City's ownership interests in the San Joaquin Reservoir to IRWD when the environmental document for the project has been certified, the City has complied with its obligations as a responsible agency, pursuant to CEQA; request Council Members Ridgeway and Debay to meet with representatives of IRWD to address and resolve any remaining issues regarding the long- term "no discharge" scenario referenced in Section 6 of BIRPA and report to the City Council; assuming completion of the sale of the City's interest in the San Joaquin Reservoir, direct the City Manager to use the proceeds to implement provisions of BIRPA or to address issues related to reclaimed water discharges; and confirm that EQAC's comments represent the City's official comments. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the City Council and staff want to see Order 94 -22 continue. He stated that they are also dedicated to making sure that the agreement is longer than eleven years and that a "no discharge" scenario is achieved. Council Member Ridgeway stated that everyone is working towards the same goal and they will work with IRWD to obtain their agreement as well. Mayor Pro Tem Adams asked if the second action in the motion could be amended. City Attorney Burnham stated that one of the obligations of the City, as a responsible agency, is to have the City Council review the EIR. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that that the City's approval of the sale should be contingent upon the City Council's satisfaction that the final EIR is adequate. He stated that he doesn't want to give staff the authority to execute the document before the City Council has had a chance to review the EIR. Council Member Thomson asked about the "no discharge" agreement INDEX Council Member Ridgeway stated that it is addressed in the BIRPA agreement, all conditions have been complied with and Section 6 is enforceable, as stated earlier in the current meeting. Council Member Thomson stated that the fuzzy language should be removed from the document. He cited the use of "best efforts" as an example. Council Member Ridgeway stated that the City is not in the position to change the BIRPA agreement. Volume 53 - Page 667 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 INDEX Council Member Ridgeway clarified that his motion does require that the EIR be brought back to the City Council. Mayor Pro Tem Adams stated that he didn't think the motion still had what he was looking for. City Attorney Burnham stated that language could be added to the second action to state, "including City Council review and approval of the environmental document ". Council Member Ridgeway agreed to amend his motion. Referring to the third action in the motion, Council Member Glover stated that if BIRPA fulfills what the City is trying achieve, then there should be nothing else to negotiate. She stated that the only thing that is needed is for the City Attorney and the IRWD attorney to agree upon that. Council Member Ridgeway agreed and stated that the intent is to have the City deliver the message to IRWD that the requirements of BIRPA have been met. Council Member Glover suggested that "any remaining issues" be removed from the third action in the motion. City Attorney Burnham stated that Section 6 of BIRPA discusses, three principal issues, which include the connection to the outfall that's been constructed, and a diversion facility that allows IRWD to irrigate the duck ponds, which has also been constructed. He stated that the third issue is related to resolving summertime diversions and monitoring. City Attorney Burnham stated that the third issue has yet to be discussed. He suggested that the wording in the third action remain as is. Council Member Ridgeway agreed and noted that Paul Jones, General Manager of IRWD, mentioned in one of the initial negotiating meetings that a written agreement for a "no discharge" was already in place, referring to BIRPA. Council Member Ridgeway added that there will continue to be greater demand for reclaimed water in the future and not less. The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote Ayes: Thomson, Glover, Adams, Debay, Ridgeway, O'Neil, Mayor Noyes Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None ADJOURNMENT - at 10:00 n.m. Volume 53 -Page 668 City of Newport Beach City Council Minutes October 24, 2000 The agenda for the Regular Meeting was posted on October 18, 2000, at 5:20 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 53 - Page 669 II uir13-DF:7